0
Research Papers: Ocean Engineering

Full Scale Measurements and Theoretical Predictions of 2nd Order Pitch and Roll Slow Motions of a Semisubmersible Platform

[+] Author and Article Information
Vinicius L. F. Matos

Petrobras, E&P,
Av. Santa Monica 120,
Macaé, RJ, 27943-625, Brazil
e-mail: vmatos@petrobras.com.br

Eric O. Ribeiro

Petrobras, Cenpes/PDEP/TEO,
Av. Horácio Macedo 950,
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21941-915, Brazil
e-mail: eric_oliveira@petrobras.com.br

Alexandre N. Simos

University of São Paulo,
Av. Prof. Mello Moraes 2231,
São Paulo, SP, 05508-030, Brazil
e-mail: alesimos@usp.br

Sergio H. Sphaier

COPPE/Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro,
LabOceano—Parque Tecnológico do Rio,
Rua Paulo Emídio Barbosa,
485, Quadra 07-A,
Cidade Universitária, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21.941-907, Brazil
e-mail: sphaier@peno.coppe.ufrj.br

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received October 6, 2010; final manuscript received June 30, 2012; published online June 6, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Moo-Hyun Kim.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 135(3), 031106 (Jun 06, 2013) (10 pages) Paper No: OMAE-10-1102; doi: 10.1115/1.4024206 History: Received October 06, 2010; Revised June 30, 2012

In Oct. 2007, the semisubmersible platform PETROBRAS 52 (P-52) was installed in Campos Basin (Roncador Field) offshore Brazil, in a depth around 1800 m through 16 lines in taut-leg con. The maximum production capacity is 180.000 bpd with a displacement of 80,986t at the operational draft of 27.5 m. Slow drift motions in the vertical plane (heave, roll, and pitch) were observed in a model test performed in a wave basin during the design phase. As resonant responses vary considerably with the damping loads, slow motion could be affected by scale effects. To observe the phenomena, by that time, it was a doubt if this phenomenon would happen during the platform operation. Since June 2008, PETROBRAS has been monitoring P-52 motions with the use of accelerometers and rate-gyros. Through spectral analysis of the measured signals, it was possible to verify the presence of slow motions with frequencies around the natural frequencies of roll and pitch during almost the whole monitoring period. Sometimes, the 2nd order amplitudes were even greater than the 1st order ones. Furthermore, the environmental conditions have also been monitored through wave radars, ADCPS (current) and meteorological stations (wind) in the vicinity of P-52 location, making the excitation loads identification possible. A comparative study confronting full-scale measurements and theoretical predictions was performed. First and second-order forces and responses were calculated using Wamit® second order module. This study permitted the estimation of the full scale damping values of this offshore system (hull plus mooring and riser lines) for one of the environmental conditions measured. The results indicate the importance of considering the resonant roll and pitch motions in the seakeeping analysis of large-volume semisubmersible platforms, contributing with an important feedback to future designs.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

MARINTEK REPORT, 2002, “Roncador FPU Model Tests—Main Report,” Norwegian Marine Technology Research Institute, Trondheim, Norway.
Ogilvie, T. F., 1983, “Second-Order Hydrodynamic Effects on Ocean Platforms,” Proceedings of the International Workshop on Ship and Platform Motions, R. W.Yeung, ed., University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, pp. 205–265.
Pinkster, J. A., 1975, “Low-Frequency Phenomena Associated With Vessels Moored at Sea,” SPE J., 15(6), pp. 487–494. [CrossRef]
Wamit Inc., 2006, “Wamit User Manual Versions 6.3, 6.3PC, 6.3S, 6.3S-PC,” WAMIT Inc., Chestnut Hill, MA.
Lee, C. H., Newman, J. N., Kim, M. H., and Yue, D. K. P., 1991, “The Computation of Second-Order Wave Loads,” Proceedings of the OMAE’91 Conference, Vol. I-A, Offshore Technology, Stavanger, Norway, pp. 113–23.
Kareem, A., 1980, “Dynamic Effects of Wind on Offshore Structures,” Proceedings Offshore Technology Conference, Paper No. OTC 3764.
Welch, P. D., 1967, “The Use of Fast Fourier Transform for the Estimation of Power Spectra: A Method Based on Time Averaging Over Short Modified Periodograms,” IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust., AU-15, pp. 70–73. [CrossRef]
Rossi, R. R., 2006, “P52 Mooring Anayisis,” Relatório Técnico I-RL-3010.64-1320-960-PPC-001_C, CENPES (in Portuguese).
SSTAB, 2004, “SSTAB User Manual,” Versão 2.68, TeCGraf - Grupo de Tecnologia em Computação Gráfica, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil (in Portuguese).
MultiSurf®, 2008, “User Manual, Version 6.9,” AeroHydro, Inc., Southwest Harbor, ME.
Kim, M., 1992, “Difference-Frequency Wave Loads on a Large Body in Multi-Directional Waves,” Appl. Ocean Res., 14, pp. 353–370. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Model test with P-52 (see Ref. [1])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Scheme of the positioning of the platform P52 showing wave spectrum radar plot

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Displacement (a) and draft (b) of PETROBRAS semisubmersibles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Spectral density functions of pitch movement (DOF = 16) for different mooring configurations and same wave sea condition (a); same results, giving more emphasis to the resonant range (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

P-52 picture after the topside installation (deck mating) in Angra dos Reis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Picture of the equipment OCTANS® installed at P-52

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Statistics of P-52 roll (a) and pitch (b) measured with OCTANS®: June 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

P-52 roll (a) and pitch (b) 1st and 2nd order significant amplitudes: June 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

P-52 roll, pitch and heave natural periods: June 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

P-52 time series for roll (a) and pitch (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Current velocity measured in (m/s) in the vicinity of P-52 June 15–19, 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Wind velocity measured in P-52

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Spectral density function for the time series showed in Fig. 12

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Wave spectrum map: directional wave spectrum measured in the first hour of June 17, 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Force coefficients by direction of wind incidence

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Wind moment spectral density functions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

SSTAB model prepared for P-52

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Spectral density function for the time series presented in Fig. 10: roll (a) and pitch (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Spectral density functions of second order roll and pitch moments caused by waves (smwaroll and smwapitch): first hour of June 17, 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison of resonant second order roll (a) and pitch (b). P-52 theoretical and measured movements in the first hour of June 17, 2008 (DOF—degrees of freedom used in the spectral analysis).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Unidirectional wave spectrum density function measured in the first hour of June 17, 2008

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Comparison of resonant second order roll (a) and pitch (b). P-52 theoretical and measured movements in the first hour of June 17, 2008: theoretical calculation with directional wave spectrum (DOF—degrees of freedom used in the spectral analysis).

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In